POLITICAL: FW: tyranny

[Guest guest]

Is freedom of food choice a myth in the United States? . It should not be the

FDA's business to tell us what we can and cannot eat.

-

" The FDA essentially believes that nobody has the right to choose what to eat

or drink. You are only " allowed " to eat or drink what

the FDA gives you permission to. There is no inherent right or God-given right

to consume any foods from nature without the FDA's

consent.

This is no exaggeration. It's exactly what the FDA said in its own words. "

- Mike - Natural News

http://www.naturalnews.com/028757_raw_milk_FDA.html

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/05/29/fda-says-you-have-\

no-right-to-real-food-unless-they-give-you-permissio

n-first.aspx?aid=CD945

FDA Says You Have No Right to Real Food Unless They Give You Permission First

Posted By Dr. Mercola | May 29 2010 | 20,425 views

The FDA has finally made its food-rights policy crystal clear. Here's the

agency's position, made evident in their response to a

lawsuit filed by the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund:

* They believe you have no absolute right to any raw unprocessed food, unless

the FDA says it's okay

* They believe you have no right to good health, except as approved by the FDA

* They believe that there is no right for citizens to contract privately for

their food

The Complete Patient reports:

" More Americans appear to be getting the message ... Over the past six months,

we've had the popular push in Wisconsin, a state

where the regulators have gone bonkers to eliminate raw milk, to pressure

legislators to approve making it available from the farm

.... [and] a firestorm building in Massachusetts over a ... decision by a

regulator to restrict consumer access to milk. "

Sources:

The Complete Patient April 30, 2010

<http://www.thecompletepatient.com/journal/2010/4/30/the-food-rights-firestorm-s\

preads-is-big-dairy-helping-regul.html>

Dr. Mercola's Comments:

If you try to purchase a gallon of raw milk in the majority of U.S. states, you

could be taken away in handcuffs . literally. With

the exception of 10 states that allow retail raw milk sales, and 15 that allow

farm sales, purchasing raw milk in the United States

is a crime, according to the FDA.

Their decision to ban the interstate shipment of raw milk back in 1987 has been

declared unconstitutional by many Americans

interested in securing their right to choose fresh, unprocessed and

unpasteurized food for their families, but the FDA has been

fighting back, even going so far as to harass and legally prosecute small dairy

farmers and consumers seeking to distribute the

milk.

The issue reached new heights earlier this year when the Farm-to-Consumer Legal

Defense Fund (FTCLDF) filed a lawsuit against the

FDA over their raw milk ban . and you won't believe how the FDA responded.

You Have " No Absolute Right to Consume . Any Particular Food "

Last month, the FDA responded <http://www.ftcldf.org/litigation-FDA-status.htm>

to FTCLDF's suit that banning raw milk in

interstate commerce is unconstitutional. Their rebuttal contained the following

extremely concerning and outrageous statements:

* " There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular

food. "

* " There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access

to foods of all kinds. "

* " Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and

physical health, which includes what foods they do

and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly

unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental

right to obtain any food they wish. "

* FDA's brief goes on to state that " even if such a right did exist, it

would not render FDA's regulations unconstitutional

because prohibiting the interstate sale and distribution of unpasteurized milk

promotes bodily and physical health. "

* " There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract. "

Since when did the FDA have authority to tell you what you can and cannot eat

and feed your children? Apparently they believe

they've had it all along.

If you go by these assertions, it means the FDA has the authority to prohibit

any food of their choosing and make it a crime for you

to seek it out. If, one day, the FDA deems tomatoes, broccoli or cashews capable

of causing you harm (which is just as ludicrous as

their assertions that raw milk is harmful), they could therefore enact such a

ban and legally enforce it.

What this means is that freedom of food choice is a myth if you live in the

United States, and this simply is not acceptable. As

FTCLDF states:

" Growing numbers of people in this country are obtaining the foods of their

choice through private contractual arrangements such as

buyers' club agreements and herdshare contracts.

FDA's position is that the agency can interfere with these agreements because,

in FDA's view, there is no fundamental right to enter

into a private contract to obtain the foods of choice from the source of choice.

As for the agency's contention that there is no fundamental right to obtain any

food, including raw milk, here is what the

'substantive due process' clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States

Constitution provides: no person shall " be deprived of

life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. "

Obtaining the foods of your choice is so basic to life, liberty and property

that it is inconceivable that the 'right of food

choice' would not be protected under the Constitution but FDA is saying " No. " "

Whether you're currently a raw milk drinker or not, the FDA's arrogant attitude

that they have authority over your choice of food is

atrocious.

First Raw Milk, What's Next?

As regular readers know, I am an avid supporter of raw milk.

Organically-raised, grass-fed milk naturally contains healthy " good " bacteria,

including lactobacillus and acidophilus. There are

also several coliform families of bacteria.

Raw milk also contains nutrients, which are virtually eliminated by the

pasteurization process of commercial milk. The presence of

beneficial bacteria is what makes raw milk such an outstanding food source to

promote the growth of healthy bacteria in your

intestine, which in turn has a significant, beneficial impact on your overall

immune function and health.

However, my purpose today is not to extol the virtues of raw milk. If you'd like

to learn more about that, just listen to this video

with health and business journalist E. Gumpert

<http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/11/14/Choosing-Between-\

Raw-Milk-and-a-Dead-White-Liquid.aspx> , author of

Raw Milk Revolution: Behind America

<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1603582193/optimalwellnessc> 's Emerging

Battle Over

Food Rights.

What I want to share is that if this unconstitutional ban has happened with raw

milk, it's only a matter of time before another

health-promoting, life-giving food is targeted.

The FDA never had any grounds for making the sale of raw milk illegal in the

first place. Even a quick review of the data shows that

this food, which the FDA claims is so harmful to human health, is less harmless

than countless food products that have earned the

FDA's seal of approval!

In their lawsuit, FTCLDF pointed out that CDC statistics from 2007 showed over

7,000 outbreaks of food-borne illness related to

bacteria

<http://www.grist.org/article/raw-milk-takes-center-stage-in-food-rights-lawsuit\

-against-fda/> , which resulted in 678

hospitalizations and 11 deaths.

In that same year, and using CDC data, raw milk was responsible for only 32 of

those cases, which amounts to only 0.5 percent of all

food-borne bacteria-related illness. Further, there were only two

hospitalizations related to raw milk, and no deaths, whereas three

people died from drinking pasteurized milk!

They also pointed out, and rightly so, that the FDA is taking an unfairly harsh

approach with raw milk. For instance, unpasteurized

juices are sold with just a warning label letting consumers know the juice has

not been pasteurized, while raw milk has been

outright banned in many states.

Is it a coincidence that some of the states where raw milk sales are illegal are

also among the largest dairy producers in the

United States (namely Wisconsin and Iowa)?

Hardly.

The conventional dairy industry has a very powerful lobbying force. What would

happen to the majority of the dairy industry if raw

milk really caught on? They'd be forced to clean up their acts, raise healthier

cows, and give them access to pasture, as only

healthy cows are the ones that you would buy raw milk from

<http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/05/01/mark-mcafee-inter\

view.aspx> .

And this would cost them money . lots of money, if it were even possible at all.

Join the Raw Milk Revolution and Stand Up for Your Food Freedom!

By joining the fight to make access to healthy raw milk a right for all

Americans, you are not only standing up for raw milk; you're

taking a stand to protect your freedom of food choice.

No one, and certainly not any government agency, should be able to restrict your

access to pure, unadulterated food. Organizations

like the Weston <http://realmilk.com/why.html> A. Price Foundation and the

Farm-to-Consumer <http://www.ftcldf.org/> Legal Defense

Fund are working toward true freedom of choice for American consumers, and I

urge you to get involved in their causes.

Related